AirAsia Flight QZ8501 Missing

[facthunter]

There was a steep cockpit gradient at Teneriffe. The Captain was GOD. Nev

 

 

[Yenn]

If I remember correctly the Tenerife accident didn't have any Asians involved. It was the most senior Dutch captain, who made the decision to go, even when questioned by his offsider. While my opinion of Asians is that they lack ability when the chips are down, my opinion of Dutch is that they are always right, in their opinion. I have much more knowledge of the dutch than I have of all Asians, so I admit I may be wrong with my assesment of Asians.

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

I'm wondering about that emergency AD on the AOAs. The climb above the storm would have been on AP and if the AOAs were playing up it may have initiated that 6000fpm climb rate (they don't say how long it climbed at that rate before it stalled 30 secs maybe, more or less?) The aircraft is in large pieces so maybe they almost got away with recovery. The full report will be interesting

 

 

[fly_tornado]

everyone knows the Asian brain is inferior to the Anglo brain... ask any white guy over 50

 

 

[dutchroll]

You know how big "Asia" is and how many countries and cultures it involves don't you?

No I don't have a clue bex. Never been there in my life. Sheesh.

 

The worst airline disaster ever was directly due to this (Tenerife) and somewhat in 447 being compared here, besides many others not Asian in the slightest.

Yes it was. And my comment still stands. The authority culture issues have been well documented in airline flight safety circles, however you should not read into my comment more than exactly what I wrote. Some, like Korean Air, have worked very hard on addressing that culture. I was simply stating that I acknowledge Asian pilot training has come a long way (I actually wrote those words above, if you'd like to re-read them), but there are still cockpit gradient culture issues. Then I made it clear that I didn't know whether or not this was a factor. That's all. Stop trying to read some ulterior overtones into it. There are a number of Asian airlines I would be happy to travel on, and friends of mine ask me that question (do you think "airline x" is safe?) all the time.

 

 

[bexrbetter]

No I don't have a clue bex. Never been there in my life. Sheesh.

For a guy with big round eyes you didn't see much.

 

 

[facthunter]

Nothing Dutch has said would merit a cheap shop like that Bex Mate. Nev

 

 

[dutchroll]

Yeah I wasn't going to respond. I thought what I wrote and meant was clear enough, and I've spent weeks trying to convince bogan friends of mine that not all Muslims are Islamic extremists using my time spent in Asia over the last 30 years as an example.

 

But I don't feel the need to send my lifetime CV to Bex or anyone else.

 

 

[robinsm]

What the hell do comments like these have to do with a missing airliner. Grow up fellas and get back on track. If you dont like the way someones eyes look, then dont look OK!!!

 

 

[dutchroll]

.....and speaking of the price of eggs, the latest info that the stall warning could be heard in the CVR background "for quite some time" (according to one of the investigators) indicates to me that they will find similarities with AF447, as predicted. I'll be really interested to eventually read the exchange between the two pilots and see what sort of cross-cockpit communications were going on.

 

 

[dsam]

.....and speaking of the price of eggs, the latest info that the stall warning could be heard in the CVR background "for quite some time" (according to one of the investigators) indicates to me that they will find similarities with AF447, as predicted. I'll be really interested to eventually read the exchange between the two pilots and see what sort of cross-cockpit communications were going on.

Similarities between these two tragic events cause me to really wonder whether the modern airliner cockpit is causing pilots to loose the ability to actually fly a plane. Natural "seat of the pants" skills atrophy if left un-used. Do the basic stick and rudder skills ever get reinforced during an airline pilot's career, or does that just fall by the wayside in modern commercial aviation?

 

 

[facthunter]

Best to wait and be sure of what happened.. It is fairly difficult to fly a plane at the cruise levels they operate at "by hand", and maintain normal tolerences.. IF you have to you need to get more separation from other traffic. Vertically.

 

The storm would be a place of extreme turbulence. Often enough to exceed design loads or cause what is called an "upset" especially if there is significant icing which uses engine power to provide "Bleed air" and you can end up too high for the power you have.. I don't believe in flying through those storms. That's what the weather radar is for. Nev

 

 

[dsam]

Best to wait and be sure of what happened.. It is fairly difficult to fly a plane at the cruise levels they operate at "by hand", and maintain normal tolerences.. IF you have to you need to get more separation from other traffic. Vertically.The storm would be a place of extreme turbulence. Often enough to exceed design loads or cause what is called an "upset" especially if there is significant icing which uses engine power to provide "Bleed air" and you can end up too high for the power you have.. I don't believe in flying through those storms. That's what the weather radar is for. Nev

True, best not to speculate specifically in this most recent case (yet). Speaking generally though, how confident are airline pilots to bypass cockpit systems when things are obviously haywire, declare the emergency, and actually (& skillfully) take over the flying sometime before they smash into the ocean! How good are the simulator regiems to test this "human factor" in their pilots & co-pilots as an effective team?

Also questionable is a flight crew setting up a flight plan through such weather in the first place - again it is down to a pilot's ability (or perhaps his authority against the company fuel budget).

 

 

[dutchroll]

Similarities between these two tragic events cause me to really wonder whether the modern airliner cockpit is causing pilots to loose the ability to actually fly a plane. Natural "seat of the pants" skills atrophy if left un-used. Do the basic stick and rudder skills ever get reinforced during an airline pilot's career, or does that just fall by the wayside in modern commercial aviation?

In my company at least, yes to an extent. However even doing 4 x 4 hour simulator checks every year, the CASA licence assessment matrix is so huge that it's hard to fit a lot of that type of skills training in. But yes, they do try.

The level of "stick and rudder" proficiency is quite affected by aircraft type and route structure. On the ultra-longhaul routes it's worst. Your whole day is one takeoff, a 14 hour flight in an approximately straight line, and one landing. Maybe a day or 2 later, the other pilot gets his one takeoff and landing on the return sector. With rest requirements and normal hours limitations, you simply can't really fit a lot of that type of flying into a year and expect lots of takeoffs, landings, and hand flying. If you're on shorthaul routes and getting lots of takeoffs and landings (sometimes 3 or 4 per day) those flying skills are a lot more practised.

 

However certainly in the Air France case, poor training leading to a lack of understanding of the aircraft systems, degraded modes of operation, and a few other things all led to the crash.

 

I agree with FH that flying a big jet at high altitude in the cruise is not that easy. Flying it by hand in that scenario is a total waste of time, in my opinion. There is minimal training or skill benefit.

 

Also questionable is a flight crew setting up a flight plan through such weather in the first place

The flight crew don't plan the route. The airline does that. The flight crew then have to deal with the weather that the airline planned the flight through. The exceptions are things like cyclones or volcanic eruptions. They will plan around those at least!

 

 

[dsam]

Thanks dutchroll. That's about what I thought. I didn't really mean to imply handflying in the cruise for practice with passengers. It was more about simulator training regiems testing what skills can be demonstrated when system failures make handflying a necessity. Further, what cockpit teamwork gets demonstrated at such times, (authority gradient, confidence, etc).

 

 

[dutchroll]

..... again it is down to a pilot's ability (or perhaps his authority against the company fuel budget).

Company flight plans arrive with the pre-determined absolute minimum amount of fuel ordered, however Australian CARs give the PIC absolute authority to load whatever fuel he feels he needs. Indeed it's a criminal offence for a PIC to not load sufficient fuel for the flight.

While being aware of the fact that the company has to make money for us to survive, most guys I know have no qualms whatsoever about loading extra fuel for weather issues over and above the minimum legal requirements. Occasionally the company gets their knickers in a knot over it, but most of the time it's suggested to them that they have another read of the regs.

 

 

[facthunter]

There is pressure to go with less fuel than you would like sometimes. It depends on the airline and whether it has an effective Union. If you carry too much you will end up in the office. The PIC is by LAW required to carry sufficient fuel and that includes diversions with the most critical operation (usually depressurised) from a PNR. When you have to offload baggae for the flight and passengers the pressure is on.

 

Airlines that are "with it" seem to like their pilots flying things like Pitts etc on their days off, but they wouldn't want them to kill themselves or infringe their available flight duty time.

 

'

 

Many commercial Pilots and higher have NEVER spun an aircraft. I can't see that as a satisfactory situation, but perhaps I'm old fashioned. If a commercial Jet "upsets"( falls out of a level) out of control it is generally recoverable but it won't do it by itself and it may take considerable loss of altitude. Maybe 15.000 feet. Nev

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

FH A few years ago i met a 747 Cpt that owned a Tiger Moth. His employer actively discouraged him flying it as it ate into his monthly hours. He flew it anyway.

 

 

[dutchroll]

Our "iconic Australian airline" has relaxed their attitude to non-company flying in the last few years. You used to require written permission from a senior manager and there were a whole list of caveats. Common sense finally prevailed (which in my company means a manager must've been struck unconscious by lightning one evening and then had an epiphany) and formal permission is no longer required. The pilot is required to monitor their own flight time compliance (company flown hours are already screened for this, so you just have to make sure your private hours don't push you over the limits), and is supposed to submit a monthly hours report to the company for the purpose of entering on the hours database. Quite a number of my colleagues have their own aircraft or fly with aero clubs etc.

 

Many commercial Pilots and higher have NEVER spun an aircraft. I can't see that as a satisfactory situation, but perhaps I'm old fashioned.

You won't get any argument from me there. Unfortunately airlines won't pay for that sort of additional training.

 

 

[dsam]

It sounds to me like here in Oz, the inclination and skillset to take over an "upset" airliner is more likely to be found, thanks to the prevalence of GA/RA opportunities our pilots tend to take up and maintain.

 

In our neighbouring countries, GA "sideline activities" would be much less likely. Add to this the dis-inclination to challenge authority figures over fuel for diversions, and cockpit authority issues during confusing system failures, and the whole picture seems a bit more disturbing.

 

The best hope is for more rigorous simulator training throughout a pilot's career, I would think - particularly in countries where dabbling in GA isn't prevalent.

 

 

[facthunter]

Where a poor standard has been identified the aircraft manufacturer gets into the act and often runs the simulator programme or at least has a big say in the content and standards.

 

There ARE cultural issues especially when as is often the case, the PIC is from a service background and has RANK.. The second pilot is often reluctant to say much, as respect is so important in hierarchical situations in most of those countries. Loss of face is a difficult thing.

 

In Australia by contrast the co pilot assumes you are a D!**#ead and keeps a good watch on you out of shear fear and actually delights in pointing out that you have done it wrong. (So I'm told) Nev

 

 

[planedriver]

This thread is such interesting reading, and I really appreciate the input from those in the know like dutchroll and Dusty Crophopper:duck for cover:(sorry FH)

 

I would have thought that the more aeronautical knowledge the better, and would contribute to a safer pilot when the electronics have a glitch for whatever reason.

 

However I know a nice guy with heaps of experience on different types, also as an instructor, works on our favorite airlines planes, and would love to fly even RPT, and yet they claim he's too experienced for their normal intake.

 

I know i'd sooner fly with him, than a young sim jockey probably chosen by an accountant type who only looks at the bottom line..

 

Experience normally has to be paid for, and rightly so.

 

Just tell that to the bean-counters, and ask them who'd they like to fly with, knowing that there was a chance that something may go belly-up during their flight, before they board..

 

 

[dutchroll]

However I know a nice guy with heaps of experience on different types, also as an instructor, works on our favorite airlines planes, and would love to fly even RPT, and yet they claim he's too experienced for their normal intake.

Although my company hasn't hired a pilot for 6 years now, I can assure you that when they were hiring flat out, there were a lot of raised eyebrows among us when looking at who they accepted or rejected. Airline pilot recruitment can be a strange process, and very dependent on who is running the recruitment section at the time.

 

 

[dutchroll]

http://www.smh.com.au/world/airasia-disaster-pilots-disabled-computers-moments-before-crash-20150129-131qq4.html

 

Well it's becoming more interesting with the fact that the Indonesian accident investigation is leaking like a sieve.

 

It seems the pilots attempted to reset both FACs (Flight Augmentation Computers) in flight possibly due to rudder or yaw damper problems they were having, then climbed rapidly and stalled. Although my experience is on the later A330, the systems have a very similar architecture. Disabling the FACs would also have put the flight control system into Alternate Law and removed the stall protection component of the flight envelope protection system (stall warning still works though). What possessed them to do this, and why they then stalled it, and why they failed to recover from the stall, is still a bit of a mystery.

 

There are increasingly obvious parallels with AF447 (although icing may not have been involved) at least with the possible failure to recognise the transition to Alternate Law (and ramifications of it), the mishandling of the aircraft leading to a stall, then the failure to effect a recovery. Even in Alternate Law, an Airbus is still a plane, and the basic principles still work.

 

 

[facthunter]

Planey's contentions have some validity. CNC technology is supposed to take the skill out of machining so people are cheaper to hire and easy to replace in the manufacturing environment.

 

In Aviation the equivalent is the modern fly by wire system with computers doing the business of making the plane unable to be stalled or whatever. Pilots were said to be contributing to many crashes.. I think they also thought that training costs would reduce, and pilot's deskilled and easier to replace. No one sort of says that but you know what I mean. You can probably built the structure a bit lighter if the crew can't excede a certain "G" figure.

 

The trouble is, particularly with some of the Airbus systems (as I see it) it's hard to actually know what the aircraft is doing at a particular point in time, on occasions.. Which management MODE/ LOGIC (my words) it is in. Confusion results and under pressure more so.

 

The pilot has to understand and manage the flying environment he/she is in .Is there turbulence , icing, is the cruise altitude safe under the conditions at the time Is the balance OK where fuel is used to balance for economy (more rearward than normal These are normal pilot management concerns) You can still put the plane into a situation it shouldn't be in. The flight management system won't let you stall it or overload the airframe, but you can still run out of fuel or run into a mountain or have the wrong weight for take off applying. An accelerometer could easily check that but I don't think it's been done. Nev